Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Genomic Selection (GS) in tree breeding optimizes genetic gains by leveraging genomic data to enable early selection of seedlings without phenotypic data reducing breeding cycle and increasing selection intensity. Traditional assessments of the potential of GS in forest trees have typically focused on model performance using cross-validation within the same generation but evaluating effectively realized predictive ability (RPA) across generations is crucial. This study estimated RPAs for volume growth (VOL), wood density (WD), and pulp yield (PY) across four generations breeding of . The training set spanned three generations, including 34,461 trees with three-year growth data, 6,014 trees with wood quality trait data, and 1,918 trees with 12,695 SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) data. Employing single-step genomic BLUP, we compared the genomic predictions of breeding values (GEBVs) for 1,153 fourth-generation full-sib seedlings in the greenhouse with their later-collected phenotypic estimated breeding values (EBVs) at age three years. RPAs were estimated using three GS targets (individual trees, trees within families, and families), two selection criteria (single- and multiple-trait), and training populations of either all 1,918 genotyped trees or the 67 direct ancestors of the selection candidates. RPAs were higher for wood quality traits (0.33 to 0.59) compared to VOL (0.14 to 0.19) and improved for wood traits (0.42 to 0.75) but not for VOL when trained only with direct ancestors, highlighting the challenges in accurately predicting growth traits. GS was more effective at excluding bottom-ranked candidates than selecting top-ranked ones. The between-family GS approach outperformed individual-tree selection for VOL (0.11 to 0.16) and PY (0.72 to 0.75), but not for WD (0.43 vs. 0.42). Furthermore, higher levels of relatedness and lower genotype by environment (G × E) interaction between training and testing populations enhanced RPAs for VOL (0.39). In summary, despite limited effectiveness in ranking top VOL individuals, GS effectively identified low-performing individuals and families. These multi-generational findings underscore GS's potential in tree breeding, stressing the importance of considering relatedness and G × E interaction for optimal performance.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11558521 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1462285 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!